Can anyone who is more well read tell me if there is any philosophy work that revises the theory of dialectical materialism in light of modern scientific advances? I just finished Elementary Principles of Philosophy (FLP edition) which was extremely enlightening but some of the scientific examples are dated and it got me thinking. Physics (and all sciences for that matter) has advanced quite a bit in the past fifty years and I'd love to read a principled critique/investigation/discussion on how our current understanding of nature modifies our understanding of materialism. Also if there are any critiques of idealism in the understanding of modern science

  • Mardoniush [she/her]
    ·
    3 years ago

    So, Engles is correct here, and with the development of the Standard model Dialectical Materialism had to develop, as did all philosophies of science. Primarily, this involved the incorporation of probabilistic methodologies (DM being as prone to things like more developed versions of Raven's Paradox as Positivism is) whereas before you could abstract DM as kind of the sum-over vector of various contradictions.

    Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, post QED we've kind of stalled, a lot of particle/condensed matter physics progress has been made, and our observational data is way way better, but String theory, alternatives like LQG, and even our current understanding of Dark Matter/Dark Energy look like dead ends. Also the end of the USSR stalled most DM research, at least in the west.

    In China an over-reliance on DM has the smell of the excesses of the second stage of the Cultural Revolution (where revolutionaries with only modest understanding of physics and DM tried to force professors to recant General Relativity and similar under threat of death.), though I believe there might be active programs remaining, and there certainly are in Vietnam

    • Camboozie [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      3 years ago

      Do you have any sources on the cultural revolution and the renunciation of GR? I remember reading that in the Three Body Problem but honestly just assumed it was mostly BS. I can see how having a poor understanding of DM could lead to an idealist view in which dogmatic adherence to DM places it before scientific knowledge/understanding of matter. I don't think I fully understand how GR is incompatible with DM but I also got a D in that class lol

      • Mardoniush [she/her]
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/wps-2016-0008/html

        Here is one, basically it's all fucking Zhdanov's fault, like so many cringe things about Socialist Art and Science. I have a translation of the Ju and Xu article in hardcopy around here somewhere gestures at pile of books.

        Unfortunately, the Cultural Revolution events in the TBP actually happened, though they're a bit over-dramatised.